If you're thinking of auxiliary archives, those also only get processes for
testable deployments.  Otherwise I have no idea what you're referring to
I'm afraid.

John

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:27 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Ps: or use a container which supports enrichment instead or archive
> enrichment?
>
> Le 8 oct. 2017 19:22, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]> a
> écrit :
>
>> What about wrapping the contextual container and enrich it in deploy?
>>
>> Le 8 oct. 2017 18:54, "John D. Ament" <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>
>>> Hey guys (maybe Mark specifically?)
>>>
>>> A number of people have been copying the pattern you helped create,
>>> where we use an archive appender in Arquillian to add test classes.  This
>>> works, however it causes an issue.
>>>
>>> I opened a bug against Arquillian, because deployments that expect
>>> exceptions to be thrown are not testable.  Deployments that are not
>>> testable do not execute archive appenders.  I have a proposed fix, but the
>>> API is ugly.
>>>
>>> So I'm wondering, are there any other ideas to get tests running when
>>> deployment exceptions are expected?  Otherwise I think I'll end up having
>>> to import the tests and modify them to mirror the results.  It will mean
>>> needing to duplicate this group of tests:
>>> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-safeguard/blob/master/safeguard-tck-tests/pom.xml#L80-L96
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>

Reply via email to